Hi Antoine,

Apologies for the delay. Got some time to work on it and updated the doc
with the requested numbers.

   - Obtained the numbers for ZSTD again. I agree they were incorrect.
   - Fixed the algorithm to use decompressed size/data
   - Added BSS + ZSTD to the evaluation metrics
   - Added BSS + Lz4 to the evaluation metrics


Updated doc :
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZZOtxmq6K8pNU0npijfSglTJVkspXL5GLDKPSGj9HlA/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.uzgoevv9ajp
Will be pushing the branch/code for the same today.

Best
Prateek

On Wed, Dec 10, 2025 at 11:30 AM Antoine Pitrou <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> I looked at the doc and the stated decompression speeds for ZSTD look
> highly irrealistic.
>
> I think what happens is that you are computing decompression speed as:
>
>    size of compressed data / time to decompress
>
> while you should really compute it as:
>
>    size of uncompressed data / time to decompress
>
> Otherwise you're simply making ZSTD look miserable because it compresses
> so well.
>
> Also, I think you should also add BYTE_STREAM_SPLIT + ZSTD into the mix
> (and possible BYTE_STREAM_SPLIT + LZ4 if you're going to evaluate LZ4).
>
> Regards
>
> Antoine.
>
>
> Le 06/12/2025 à 23:24, PRATEEK GAUR a écrit :
> > Hi team,
> >
> > We wanted to share performance numbers for one of the candidate encodings
> > we have been discussing for parquet, for numeric compression.
> >
> > Following doc, PFOR : Encoding
> > <
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZZOtxmq6K8pNU0npijfSglTJVkspXL5GLDKPSGj9HlA/edit?tab=t.0
> >,
> > talks through numbers on compression speed, compression ratio and
> > decompression speed for columns values from the clickbench data. Based on
> > the numbers PFOR gives superior decompression speed compared to
> > DELTABITPACK and RLEBITPACKHYBRID and fares better on average in
> > compression ratio. Comparison has also been made with ZSTD compression in
> > the above doc.
> >
> > We plan to expand to a few more datasets and work on a prototype in arrow
> > cpp code in early Jan.
> > Looking forward to the feedback from the group.
> >
> > Best
> > Prateek
> >
>
>
>

Reply via email to